You are here

China, the Great Game, and Globalism

Trump is departing from classical geopolitics founded on the confrontation of Land and Sea. It is on this framework that rested the Great Game between Russia and Britain in the 19th century as well as essentially all geopolitics of the 20th century - from Mackinder to the Cold War up to the purely Atlanticist, unipolar globalization which the American administration has been pursuing up to the last minute.

This means that the China factor is changing its geopolitical status. The beginning of China’s Perestroika in the 1980’s was marked by a visit to Beijing by a Tripartite Commission delegation including Brzezinski and Kissinger.

Their task was detaching China from the USSR once and for all, including it in the global capitalist system, encircling Eurasia, and closing the anaconda ring along the coastal zone. Afterwards, according to the plans of such globalists as Brzezinski and Kissinger who formed the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral prototype of the World Government, the USSR would soon be broken up. In fact, the Russian branch of the Trilateral Commission, the academician Gvishiani’s Institute for Applied Systems Analysis whose task was breaking up the USSR from within, figured in the Trilateral Commission’s documents on the Chinese question. Chubais, Gaidar, and Berezovsky all came from here, and they fulfilled their assignments. But everything began with China.

Why? Because China came under the tutelage of the World Government. After the shooting of democratic protesters on Tiananmen Square, the US’ response was indignant, but no steps followed. China was supposed to be engaged in the system of globalization, and this was the main goal. It’s nothing personal, Kissinger would say, just diplomacy. Double standards have long since been accepted and even become the mandatory norm.

Hence the Chinese miracle, the combination of two types of totalitarianism - Marxism in politics and Liberalism in the economy. Zero democratization, but as much capitalism as desired.

China took advantage of this and grew substantially. But since the globalists acted strictly according to the classical textbooks of geopolitics, China was still nothing more than a coastal zone. The main enemy, threat, and danger remained Russia, the Eurasian Heartland. This is how things have proceeded up to Trump.

But in his electoral campaign, Trump essentially decided to abandon geopolitics. Maybe he doesn’t know geopolitics, or maybe he doesn’t believe in it. But this is not so important, since he has rejected it. Period. And this, frankly speaking, is what is at hand.

Dismantling China as artificially supported by the globalist World Government logically follows from Trump’s anti-globalism. He looks at things plainly: a totalitarian communist country with a massive population is challenging US interests in the Pacific, threatens to annex Taiwan, has flooded America with cheap garbage, steals high technology as soon as it lays eyes on it, and is doing all of this successfully. China’s challenge is voluminous and formidable, and China’s economic growth rates are a challenge to the US. In this context, Russia, with its poor economy, is relegated to a second rate problem. This does not mean that there will be straightforward pro-Russian policies - there won’t be, because Trump is a patriot and a realist. But this does mean that Trump will seriously go after China. This is quite enough to keep him busy during his presidency.

We certainly need to take advantage of this. This does not mean that we should abandon our partnership with China and latch ourselves to Trump. This is not worthy of a great power. But the Chinese-American conflict is simply not our business. If Washington’s attention will be focused on the Far East, then we have the chance to quickly resolve our tasks in the Middle East and, most importantly, in the Eurasian space. If Trump ignores geopolitics, then he will not pay too much attention to this. At least I hope so.

By the way, about China: I don’t think that everything is right with ideology in China. There is clearly a crisis of the Heavenly Mandate that Mao received once upon a time. Behind the facade of ostentatious success, Chinese society is heading towards crisis. But, once again, this is only their, Chinese business.